MSG Cuts Off Entercom

8

Managers…how do you know when one of your hosts has gone too far? Back in August, WFAN host Maggie Gray went on a rant calling Madison Square Garden Executive Chairman James Dolan a “vile piece of trash,” among other things.

Gray attacked Dolan because of a song he released with his band called “I Should’ve Known.” The song is referencing his friend Harvey Weinstein, who’s been accused of raping and sexually harassing dozens of women. Gray’s take was Dolan was being a hypocrite because he was found liable for a hostile work environment in a 2007 sexual harassment suit.

The New York Post is reporting that MSG has ordered all of its businesses across the country to stop working with WFAN’s parent company, Entercom. Players from the New York Knicks and New York Rangers and MSG broadcasters are apparently banned from appearing on Entercom stations.

Last week, Gray apologized on the air, sort of. “I really didn’t mean to cause the pain that I did cause. Name-calling isn’t OK.”

MSG spokesperson Kim Kerns told The Post, “Entercom aired a hate-filled rant directed towards MSG, its employees, and its Executive Chairman in August of this year. They chose to take no action to remedy this until the start of this season. Only after learning they would not receive special access to players and coaches did they elect to offer an insincere half-hearted apology. We wish them no ill will. However, we decline to carry on a business relationship. We will continue to afford Entercom league-mandated access only.”

MSG owns MSG and Radio City Music Hall, but has spread the ban on Entercom across the nation, refusing to do business with the radio company in any of its markets, including Chicago and Los Angeles. MSG owns The Chicago Theatre and The Forum in LA, among other properties.

Managers….how would you handle this one if it happened to you and your stations?

No comment from Entercom about the MSG situation.

8 COMMENTS

  1. The Manager needs to bring out the PR measurement stick here and decide which is more important. the air talent or the MSG relationship and how important access is to those venues and the talent it controls.
    Considering this on air rant is now elevating outside of New York and LA and Chicago are part of the collateral damage I would be on the phone to Philly (Corporate).
    I understand that there is a parody song the station produced that took up this tit for tat another notch. Entercom is Americas largest Sports radio company and needs to protect its relationships and image with its teams and Broadcast partners.
    This year alone rogue air talent has jeopardized those relationships in Boston, SAN Diego and now New York.
    If the talent continues to bite the proverbial hand that feeds them, then expect more of the kind of response the company received in those three markets.

  2. This has nothing to do with the 1st amendment case. Congress is not telling the station what they can and can’t say.

    What it does have to do with is Radio’s wimpyness and third class attitude. WFAN has more fans in New York than James Dolan (arguably the most hated man in NYC) but instead of the station backing its host ability to cut through and give her opinion, it buckles so it can get a scintillating quote from Kevin Knox about how hard the team is working despite losing by 12.

    Another example of Radio, in a county so desperate for entertainment we made a family who created and distributed a sex tape multimillionaire TV stars and elected a grifter and unfit fraud because he can “flood the zone with sh*t”, not understanding the media environment.

    In a Game of Thrones world we are still playing by Ozzie and Harriet rules.

  3. When you find yourself sleeping in the doghouse and send flowers to “make up.” Only to find out that, the very next night, you’re still sleeping in the doghouse… and the patio light has been turned off.

  4. Think what you will…Entercom OWNS the radio station. MSG OWNS the venues. They can do what they want. Entercom could just segue songs. MSG could have an Auto Show convention. They can do what they want.

  5. The 1st Ammendment: the GOVERNMENT cannot prohibit or punish free speech. It does not mention businesses, right?
    ——
    Is there a pattern:
    In Boston, after an WEEI AM drive announcer made a racist comment, Entercom suspended him AFTER there was a public outcry, not when they became aware of it.

  6. There’s a case going to the Supreme Court this session about free speech, and whether a company can take action against someone expressing their 1st amendment right. The case is Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, and it will be interesting to see how a conservative court views this issue. It may mean businesses like MSG can’t take action like this against a broadcaster expressing their opinion in a public forum.

    • That would be awful and govt intrusion on 1st Amendment rights. If ‘businesses are people’ for purposes of free speech (ie: political donation), then the reverse has to apply and they shouldn’t be forced to do business or associate with a person or organization they choose not to associate with. ‘Free speech’ works both ways.
      Do you believe advertisers should be allowed to pull out if they disagree with a radio personality’s on-air comments? If so, your view seems a bit one-sided.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here